Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was falsely accused of some serious crimes and abuse. It turns out, having security camera footage of the entire period of time showing that not only did you do nothing of the sort, but fundamentally could not have done anything of the sort , and was actually just playing with your kids the entire time, and the accuser had to have known so, changes the dynamic of such a case quite quickly. Unfortunately, no one see…
That works now but it won't be long until they can find someone to deepfake an alternative camera showing you red handed and then the court has two conflicting stories backed up by conflicting proofs.
Also, the footage I provided was not showing anything unusual or hard to believe. I also had significant history available showing that this was normal and par for the course for me, not that anyone asked.
Their claims were quite extraordinary, and they had zero concrete evidence to back them up.
It still took awhile for the case to resolve, and they tried to make all sorts of other claims - including that the footage was from cameras that were installed without anyones knowledge and was illicitly recording, and was therefor illegal and inadmissible. so I dug up the email where the accuser had asked me for my permission if it was okay if they had it installed because it recorded audio too. That said, it was visibly, blatantly, and obviously installed in the open, and there were witnesses who could testify that had always been the case, so they had no leg to stand on anyway.
Even if I had the opportunity to fake it (which I could have, I guess, or at least edited it or something) it’s pretty hard to fake all the other circumstances which support the validity of it. They never tried to impeach the video itself.
If someone provides an unsourced security video showing the person murdering the president, and the other person shows security video from a confirmed third party using a system that had existed for years, showing they were at home watching TV at the time - and the president appears to still be alive at the time and unharmed - it’s not hard to figure out who is faking it.
I’m having a hard time imagining how they could have produced a video supporting their claims with the same level of even apparent credibility where it wouldn’t have fallen apart immediately with any investigation.
The courts already have to deal with people lying all the time and being disingenuous - it’s why the procedures exist and everything is so painful, IMO.
Knowing the rules and keeping documentation does work, generally.
I would recommend being careful to avoid situations which could be easily twisted or misinterpreted from the evidence however, especially after this situation. And never proactively provide data or show your hand to someone trying to attack you this way, as it can provide them more means to try to twist things and make life harder.
Good attorneys are key here.